Why are YOU still running Windows 2000

[goombawaho]

Not to be a curmudgeon, but it's my opinion that nobody should be running Windows 2000 at this point. The only possible exception would be people that are not connecting that 2000 PC to the internet. You know - for security flaws and holes that cannot be patched any more, the inability to run IE7, etc.

So please, tell me why YOU are running 2000. Is it because you don't have to register it with Microsoft? (running a bootleg copy).

Do you just love Windows 2000?? (I did too, back in the day)

Seriously - make this like a poll with everyone just writing in their reason. Signed - Curious George

 

[strongm]

Why? Legacy applications



>security flaws and holes that cannot be patched any more

W2K still receives security patches and will do so for at a little over another year, I believe

>inability to run IE7

1) If I'm running W2K server then I really don't care about this
2) There are perfectly good (some would say better) alternatives

 

[goombawaho]

I really wasn't concerned about those running server - more desktop where you're going to be down and dirty and exposed to the internet.

"There are perfectly good (some would say better) alternatives."

True, I was thinking of XP in that you get lots of changes to the operating system when IE7 is installed (whether you ever launch it or not) which are beneficial. But this is a moot point for 2000, so I shouldn't have mentioned that.

 

[SkipCox]

I love these "why are you still running..." threads. DOS, Windows 3.x, Win 9x, and now Windows 2000

1. It's suitable for old hardware and old applications.

2. I bought it (several copies over the years) and I want to use it.

3. W2K works well and is very configurable.

4. I have no security issues with it.

5. The inability to run IE7 sure doesn't bother me.

One install is on a P133/96Mb triple boot machine...what better way is there to use IE6SP1 on a rig running DOS/Win3.x as it's main OS?

Another install is trimmed down to about 200Mb on a thrashed/busted up T23 PIII 1.13/256Mb laptop. I used an old 1.5Gb hdd I had kicking around and the total install uses less than 500Mb including a 256Mb swap file.

My HTPC 2400+Tbred/512Mb also runs Windows 2000. With running F@H, watching TV and DVD's, recording & editing video and audio; hasn't been rebooted in months.

Kerio 2.1.5 serves as a firewall on all my old machines. A/V and other Malware applications are suited to what the processor and memory combinations can easily handle.

All my OS installs, with the exception of DOS6.x/Win3.x are updated as far as Microsoft allows.

It is surely time for business users to consider a plan moving from W2K to Windows 7 and new hardware. However, I see no reason for home and SOHO users to dump a reliable OS just because it is exposed to the internet.

Skip

 

[bert59]

To whom it may concern. I am not stuck im Win 2000. I own sevral PCs all running Xp Home or Pro. I ahve used many types of Os's over the years. Fixed PC's , crashed PC's software, fried motherboards, etc. I work in a PC Tech shop where I am learing alot about computers and plan to start my studies for an A+ cetification. The Win 2000 pc that I own was bought years ago and came with some games and apllications etc., that I cant find anywhere and I dont want to lose them, by rfe-installing the OS. Not to mention this PC with win 2000is like that old jalopy automobile that is just fun to tinker around with. Yeah I know its outdated and will never be ont the road again but I leanred alot about PCs in just a few short weeks. How to download drivers, to to create Rescue disk, how to use resources like this one " Tek Tips " which has been very helpful. Thanks for all your help Tek Tipsters. Hopefully we will be tlaking again soon. Tek Tips forums rock!!!!!!

 

[goombawaho]

Let me rephrase my question then. When that old hardware that Windows 2000 is running on FINALLY dies, what are you going to do then? There won't be drivers for modern machines running Windows 2000 (especially video).

Also, maybe I just wanted to hear some people confess that they have 14 Windows 2000 computers all running the same key code.

 

[SkipCox]

When that old hardware...FINALLY dies...?"

I'll probably fix that old hardware.

14 machines running the same key? Now that's a pretty good idea. I would only need to keep track of one cd.

Seriously, I mostly give this old stuff away (about 160 of 'em so far) and they either hit the road with a licensed copy of whatever OS, some flavor of linux, or an empty hdd.

How long do I have before I have to chuck my XP machine?

Skip

 

[harebrain]

Um, I'm still running a Win98 machine. It supports my scanner and PDA, neither of whose manufacturers exist any longer. When the old CPU's die, I'll have to buy new peripherals, too. Unless I die first, then I win!

 

[bert59]

When that old hardware that Windows 2000 is running on FINALLY dies, what are you going to do then?

Simple, Mr. Simpleton, I will move on.

 

[Grenage]

People are probably using win2k for the same reason people are still using Office 97.. it does everything they need it to.

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer

 

[archwayguy]

Apparently we are stuck on Win2k because the entire domain was built around it and Novell. Also some really ridiculous legacy apps.

 

[bert59]

Oh by the way,,


I went to the Dell website input the servicetag number of my Winn 2000 Pc and got and updated chipset and Bios, then I updated my PC with this new information. The phantom PCI device is gone!!!!!! Apparently, the drivers must have been in the chipset and possibly for an onboard item. Anyway this issue has been resolved. Thanks to all who have assisted me. But wait theres more...............stay tuned.

 

[terryISO]

When that old hardware that Windows 2000 is running on "FINALLY dies, what are you going to do then?"

Same as I do now for new stuff with no 2k drivers. I'll simply use or tweak the XP/Vista drivers.

 

[JeanW]

My Win2k machine is happely humming next to my 2003 server and my Sony with Vista.

I do all my developing on the 2000, without any problem.
I see no need to change yet.

Sure, some programs will not run on the 2000, but they will on the 2003. And if not, I have the Vista.
Or I bend and tweak the drivers...

About the internet security. I surf always in a sandbox and follow strict rules. Absolutely no danger there.

If the old machine dies, and I can't fix it anymore?
Time will tell.

For now it just does everything I need it to.

 

[HughLerwill]

I just keep the old 333Mhz/ 300MB RAM computer going with w2k and Office 2k to check for software compatibility and to extend my LAN; the machine is still usably quick and gives me no grief, good old girl!

 

[oisnds]

I use 2K because it is nonintrusive, after installing XP I notice lots of disk activity on drives that should not be accessed (indexing, etc. is turned off). I just don't need the additional overhead or features of the newer OSs.

 

[Smugclark]

We use it (all nicely licensed with their own CD's) in our office for eight desktops, and our server. Frankly, we update everything to SP4, Update Rollup 1, Installer 3.1 and a couple of other items, and turn off auto updates. We run legal applications such as Tabs3, PracticeMaster, BestCase Bankruptcy, and WordPerfect 12 and X3. It seems that every time Windows does an update, something crashes on one of those non-MS programs. Frankly, we've tried XP and even Vista, and they don't do anything for us that 2K won't do, more smoothly and solid. Our server is all new hardware supporting two sets of mirrored disks (one set for the OS and programs, and one set for data) and AMD AM2+ CPU, and does just fine. Our desktops are also AMD's--anything from Athlon XP 2500's to 939 and 754's. We don't feel like we're either "hardware or software impaired." Frankly, 2K works great for us and we'll use it as long as we're able to do so.

 

[victorv]

hi,
this is the "forum" !

It depends:

I don't like upgrade HW: i discourage my friends to change Processor, Graphic Cards, Disks(maby yes?). Wait a year and change all, buy better and lower cost.

The same is for SW: if a machine goes with 2000 (desktop or server) leave it as is, patch it if you need/want,
and new machine will run XP, Vista???, 7, 2003,8.

On new machines (new in the sense of re-formatted), I install XPSP2 or WS2K3, if thay are medium/good HW
(on machines with 1GB ram P4, XP is faster than 2000).

On lower machines (P2,3 515MB), XP is slower than 2000,
and if someone needs to use these machines, I setup 2K.

I do this activity for job, I am not a fan of IBM/HP or
Vista/2k/XP. Every customer/application has a best OS to use, due also by his history, and can be every of above OS,
also Linux, Ubuntu, or W9x, DOS.

bye all
vic

 

[xwb]

When that old hardware that Windows 2000 is running on "FINALLY dies, what are you going to do then?"

It will take a long time dying. I'm still running on machines from 1996 (133MHz P1 with 64MbRAM). They're web/file/printer servers and are on 24/7. This one has been on almost continuously (except for 2 power cuts) for the last 5 years and hasn't died yet. I've also been given 6 other PCs, of a newer vintage to take its place when it dies. The youngest is 6 years old! At this rate, I'll have enough hardware for about 30 years.

Why do I run it - connectivity. XP, Vista and Linux machines do not always see each other but everyone sees the W2K server, so I use it for file transfers. It used to be a DHCP server as well until I got a router two years ago.

 

[DaveLissa]

I found Windows 2k Server to be the best OS out there (except for Linux); fast, low memory requirements, all software that I need work on it.

The only issue I've ever found is that if you use dual monitor with high (1680 x 1025) resolution, you can't use RDP, since it appears Win2kS doesn't support running RDP on high resolutions. It works on Win2k3, though, but I still haven't found a fix for Win2kS.

Other than that, everything just plain works, and I need speed rather than bells and whistles!